From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxtram95@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@fb.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxim@isovalent.com>,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Fix error message on kfunc arg type mismatch
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:39:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240909133909.1315460-1-maxim@isovalent.com> (raw)
When "arg#%d expected pointer to ctx, but got %s" error is printed, both
template parts actually point to the type of the argument, therefore, it
will also say "but got PTR", regardless of what was the actual register
type.
Fix the message to print the register type in the second part of the
template, change the existing test to adapt to the new format, and add a
new test to test the case when arg is a pointer to context, but reg is a
scalar.
Fixes: 00b85860feb8 ("bpf: Rewrite kfunc argument handling")
Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxim@isovalent.com>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 3 ++-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c | 1 +
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c | 7 +++++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c | 2 +-
4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index d8520095ca03..8b9f0a2981d4 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -11948,7 +11948,8 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
switch (kf_arg_type) {
case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_CTX:
if (reg->type != PTR_TO_CTX) {
- verbose(env, "arg#%d expected pointer to ctx, but got %s\n", i, btf_type_str(t));
+ verbose(env, "arg#%d expected pointer to ctx, but got %s\n",
+ i, reg_type_str(env, reg->type));
return -EINVAL;
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
index 5b743212292f..f79c8e53cb3e 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ static struct kfunc_test_params kfunc_tests[] = {
TC_FAIL(kfunc_call_test_get_mem_fail_oob, 0, "min value is outside of the allowed memory range"),
TC_FAIL(kfunc_call_test_get_mem_fail_not_const, 0, "is not a const"),
TC_FAIL(kfunc_call_test_mem_acquire_fail, 0, "acquire kernel function does not return PTR_TO_BTF_ID"),
+ TC_FAIL(kfunc_call_test_pointer_arg_type_mismatch, 0, "arg#0 expected pointer to ctx, but got scalar"),
/* success cases */
TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test1, 12),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c
index 4b0b7b79cdfb..08fae306539c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_fail.c
@@ -150,4 +150,11 @@ int kfunc_call_test_mem_acquire_fail(struct __sk_buff *skb)
return ret;
}
+SEC("?tc")
+int kfunc_call_test_pointer_arg_type_mismatch(struct __sk_buff *skb)
+{
+ bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass_ctx((void *)10);
+ return 0;
+}
+
char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
index d0cdd156cd55..7afc2619ab14 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = REJECT,
- .errstr = "arg#0 expected pointer to ctx, but got PTR",
+ .errstr = "arg#0 expected pointer to ctx, but got fp",
.fixup_kfunc_btf_id = {
{ "bpf_kfunc_call_test_pass_ctx", 2 },
},
--
2.46.0
next reply other threads:[~2024-09-09 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-09 13:39 Maxim Mikityanskiy [this message]
2024-09-09 17:35 ` [PATCH bpf] bpf: Fix error message on kfunc arg type mismatch Alexei Starovoitov
2024-09-09 18:49 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2024-09-09 23:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240909133909.1315460-1-maxim@isovalent.com \
--to=maxtram95@gmail.com \
--cc=alan.maguire@oracle.com \
--cc=andreimatei1@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=maxim@isovalent.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mykolal@fb.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox